Popham v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 59 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In construing statutes it is the duty of the court to ascertain the legislative intent, and, when such intent is once arrived at, it should be given effect; in fact, such intent is the law. In determining the legislative intent, the court should not look alone to any one phrase, clause, or sentence of the act, but to the entire act; and this includes the caption, the body of the act, and the emergency clause. In this connection we hold that, even when the emergency clause cannot be given effect as such, still its provisions may be looked to if they aid the court in ascertaining the legislative intent. "When we apply the above rules to the 1930 act, supra, it becomes evident that the clause therein, `This Act shall take effect January 1, 1931,' does not mean that the act did not become a law until January 1, 1931, but merely means that it did not have effect to lengthen terms of office until such date.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Newton v. Barnes

2. “on June 1, 1939, or on or about September 21, 1939, ninety days after the adjournment of the Legislature. This seems clear when it is considered that the Popham case was cited by Judge Alexander in the Skinner opinion, and in the case first named Judge Critz said:”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Newton v. Barnes